|
|
|
The following page was printed from RemoteCentral.com:
Topic: | Who owns the program when the project is done? This thread has 305 replies. Displaying posts 31 through 45. |
|
Post 31 made on Wednesday January 28, 2009 at 07:44 |
ds53652 Long Time Member |
Joined: Posts: | December 2007 207 |
|
|
Why is this any different than any application someone buys for their intel or mac computer?
Have any of us ever been successful with getting code from Microsoft, Intuit, etc, etc? We purchase a "use" license, we don't own the code.
I don't see it any different than that, period.
|
|
Post 32 made on Wednesday January 28, 2009 at 07:46 |
D-Zyne Long Time Member |
Joined: Posts: | November 2003 290 |
|
|
On January 28, 2009 at 00:45, tweetymp4 said...
Everything that is "licensed" music, movies, software, books etc. Is protected by by copyright and licensing agreements etc. If the cherished intellectual property of an installer is not protected by patent, copyright or license agreement it belongs to the customer.
In short, if it's not specifically stipulated in a contract the customer owns it. If there is not a copyright on the user interface, you're screwed.
I personally feel that it all belongs to the customer, once he pays of course. I would never have the audacity to say or do otherwise. I can certainly see both sides of the argument on this one but in copyright law there is something known as 'work for hire', where the author of a song, book, program, etc...is given a one-off fee for his/her work and all rights are transferred to whomever hires them. This is essentially the way I see this scenario... A person that writes a song didn't 'create' the notes or chords used; an artist didn't 'create' the colours; and a writer doesn't 'create' the letters or words used...they just arrange them in a certain order to create a bigger picture. So I can't really support the module argument. Again, though, there are some good arguments on both sides..particularly since there is no tactile transfer of property required like a disc or print-out, etc.
|
|
Post 33 made on Wednesday January 28, 2009 at 07:51 |
Robert Parker Senior Member |
Joined: Posts: | March 2004 1,488 |
|
|
This comes up every now and again. I don't know about AMX but with Crestron if you read the EULA that you must agree to to use the software it all belongs to Crestron. The EULA states this very clearly. So Crestron owns all code developed with Crestron software. That said I only give the code when asked for it and the client has paid in full.
|
Clatto Verata... Necktie |
|
Post 34 made on Wednesday January 28, 2009 at 08:00 |
Shoe Founding Member |
Joined: Posts: | August 2001 1,385 |
|
|
Julie, I have mixed thoughts on this issue. I supply back ups to my customers but have been having second thoughts about this practice. My worst payer is my biggest customer who has uni-laterally increased his payment terms to 90 days. I am hesitant to give him his Crestron back up until I am payed and I am tired of playing this little game with him. All of my programs have uncompensated time built into them. The customer rarely pays for all the work that goes into their control system. The question raised by this thread is who does your magazine serve, the CE Pro or the end user? Are you thinking as a consumer or a member of the professional community?
|
|
OP | Post 35 made on Wednesday January 28, 2009 at 08:03 |
juliejacobson CE Pro Magazine |
Joined: Posts: | April 2003 3,032 |
|
|
On January 27, 2009 at 23:38, tweeterguy said...
I'm also curious why homeowners are contacting you regarding this issue. because their dealers go out of business and they are left with 100s of thousands of dollars of junk. Knowing that (and I WILL publish that), who would take such a risk?
|
"CEPro: your website sucks!" - Fins www.cepro.com[Link: twitter.com] |
|
OP | Post 36 made on Wednesday January 28, 2009 at 08:08 |
juliejacobson CE Pro Magazine |
Joined: Posts: | April 2003 3,032 |
|
|
On January 28, 2009 at 00:49, roddymcg said...
I am surprised by those here that get in a huff about this issue. I personally think that holding the client hostage when the bill is paid is a black cloud on our industry. It is one of those things that embarrass me about our industry!!
Please write the article Julie, you can mention us and direct any projects our way!! :) We will not hold any hostage... Roddy, I will do this. Once I write the story about how consumers are left in the lurch, there will be outrage. Sorry, guys, I owe it to our Electronic House audience. They need to protect themselves. There are some pretty silly analogies here, like you wouldn't expect to get the recipe from a restaurant. Huh? Has nothing to do with this issue.
|
"CEPro: your website sucks!" - Fins www.cepro.com[Link: twitter.com] |
|
OP | Post 37 made on Wednesday January 28, 2009 at 08:10 |
juliejacobson CE Pro Magazine |
Joined: Posts: | April 2003 3,032 |
|
|
On January 28, 2009 at 07:51, Robert Parker said...
This comes up every now and again. I don't know about AMX but with Crestron if you read the EULA that you must agree to to use the software it all belongs to Crestron. The EULA states this very clearly. So Crestron owns all code developed with Crestron software. That said I only give the code when asked for it and the client has paid in full. Robert, you have misinterpreted the Crestron EULA.
|
"CEPro: your website sucks!" - Fins www.cepro.com[Link: twitter.com] |
|
OP | Post 38 made on Wednesday January 28, 2009 at 08:12 |
juliejacobson CE Pro Magazine |
Joined: Posts: | April 2003 3,032 |
|
|
On January 28, 2009 at 08:00, Shoe said...
Julie, I have mixed thoughts on this issue. I supply back ups to my customers but have been having second thoughts about this practice. My worst payer is my biggest customer who has uni-laterally increased his payment terms to 90 days. I am hesitant to give him his Crestron back up until I am payed and I am tired of playing this little game with him. All of my programs have uncompensated time built into them. The customer rarely pays for all the work that goes into their control system. The question raised by this thread is who does your magazine serve, the CE Pro or the end user? Are you thinking as a consumer or a member of the professional community? As a consumer. Yours truly is now the acting editor of Electronic House. I think it's clear that customers should have access to code once they've paid. If they haven't paid in full, it's a little hairier.
|
"CEPro: your website sucks!" - Fins www.cepro.com[Link: twitter.com] |
|
Post 39 made on Wednesday January 28, 2009 at 08:14 |
flcusat Senior Member |
Joined: Posts: | April 2003 1,326 |
|
|
On January 27, 2009 at 22:22, cma said...
I work as an independant programmer for AMX, sometimes as a sub-contractor for another dealer, sometimes directly with the end user. I allways give out the code even though I use alot of custom made modules that I have developed over the years. Do you give them the compiled modules or the AXS files?
|
I'm always right. The only time I was wrong was the time that I thought, that I was wrong.
|
|
Post 40 made on Wednesday January 28, 2009 at 08:33 |
Audible Solutions Super Member |
Joined: Posts: | March 2004 3,246 |
|
|
QQQ is wrong. His case would be stronger, if on residential jobs, the programming line item actually reflected the real price of the development of the code. It does not. As was pointed out above, macros take a very long time to develop and perfect.
It has been pointed out that anyone can code anything. In theory this is true but not all programmers can write all code. Read/write coding techniques are often beyond the abilities of most residential coders, and if you have code for a particular HVAC system that works ought you to see that code, uncompensated, move into the public domain. Knowing what to code is often as important as having the ability to code. I have a coding scheme that while not unique, is not what I have found in any other job by any other firm. Should my talent fall to a competitor for free?
Copyright is nonsense. As in any contract it's only as good as your ability to enforce it. You would have to know into whose hands its fallen and you'd have to have the financial ability to take on your client--a patently stupid idea in my experience every one of my clients has 10^100000 more money then I do.
The idea that we should discuss this up front sounds great but is also nonsense. I don't discuss many items at the first meeting. Why? Because I am suggesting so many strange ideas at a time they are dealing with an overwhelming number of decisions that they will go into overload. I do not go into a programming precis till the job is 3/4 or 90% complete; after the decisions on tile, furniture, flooring, cabinets, mill work, fixtures, plumbing, wall colors and such have long been made. The client knows what will be controlled, not how or to what extent. To bring up every negative so early in a relationship is to risk losing a job.
What every client is entitled to and ought to be given is a disc with all compiled code. If his processor fails he ought to be able to reload the program into his repaired or replaced processor. What is left unstated here, is that residential jobs fund the programming line item out of equipment sales, a paradigm more and more difficult to maintain in an era of declining or non-existing equipment margins. A perfect module for a complicated device can take 500 or more hours to make perfect. No client pays 62000 for that module. It is amortized, as has been written already, over every job. Even when you have to customize a macro it can take 10 hours and clients will balk at that. Just because you have a 25k programming line item does not mean you have paid for the time that code took to write.
There are escrow accounts software can be placed if a client is willing to pay for it. But residential clients don't want to pay for even this solution.
Alan
|
"This is a Christian Country,Charlie,founded on Christian values...when you can't put a nativiy scene in front fire house at Christmas time in Nacogdoches Township, something's gone terribly wrong" |
|
Post 41 made on Wednesday January 28, 2009 at 08:34 |
Dawn Gordon Luks Founding Member |
Joined: Posts: | September 2001 1,178 |
|
|
What's nice about the new Pronto 9XXX series is that you can give the client a backup via pack-and-go, but they can't use it to actually program the remote. In situations where you haven't been paid in full, the customer can't just go to someone else for programming.
|
|
Post 42 made on Wednesday January 28, 2009 at 08:45 |
Strype Advanced Member |
Joined: Posts: | October 2008 790 |
|
|
On January 28, 2009 at 08:03, juliejacobson said...
because their dealers go out of business and they are left with 100s of thousands of dollars of junk.
Knowing that (and I WILL publish that), who would take such a risk? So if Dell went out of business you would demand the code MSWord code from Microsoft because you computer would turn into junk? Or is it You demand the code from Microsoft in case they go under because you Dell would then magically turn to junk? As has been suggested on this thread already, go talk to a proper copyright attorney that deals with software rights. I would hope, at least, that you have a responsibility to your readers to provide educated, properly informed, responsible and accurate information about subjects like this.... if you so choose to be involved..... and not just throw your opinion around as if were fact.
|
Peace - It does not mean to be in a place where there is no noise, trouble or hard work. It means to be in the midst of those things and still be calm in your heart. |
|
Post 43 made on Wednesday January 28, 2009 at 08:45 |
Duct Tape Loyal Member |
Joined: Posts: | November 2008 5,295 |
|
|
On January 28, 2009 at 00:49, 39 Cent Stamp said...
Jesus.. at least put the drop shadow in there Duct ;). If you are going to quote my post with my intellectual property linked inside, you will have to pay a royalty. I will have my lawyer, (who was recommended to me by Noel Lee), contact you and discuss payment arrangements. ;)
|
|
|
OP | Post 44 made on Wednesday January 28, 2009 at 09:00 |
juliejacobson CE Pro Magazine |
Joined: Posts: | April 2003 3,032 |
|
|
Well, you guys tell me.
Here are your options, consumer: You can get the full features of a Crestron/AMX system but you risk losing everything if your dealer won't give you the code and he either goes under or is simply bad.
Or, you can get control4, Lifeware, Homelogic, etc. It's not AMX or Crestron but if something happens to your dealer, ANYONE can reprogram your system.
What would a consumer do?
|
"CEPro: your website sucks!" - Fins www.cepro.com[Link: twitter.com] |
|
Post 45 made on Wednesday January 28, 2009 at 09:09 |
Rob Grabon Founding Member |
Joined: Posts: | November 2001 1,392 |
|
|
The article should stay focused on informing the users they should discuss with their CI the issue of code licensing.
It should not imply what their rights are. Or even the issues discussed here regarding who's copyright etc. Journalism is about fact not opinion.
Until there is a case or law that clearly states ownership, each installer and user should discuss the relationship they wish to pursue.
Clients should not be held hostage by their programmers either. If a CI can no longer support a project then the CI should either sell or hand over a copy of the program for someone else to support it.
Does anyone not agree that the terms should be in a contract and discussed before project completion?
|
Technology is cheap, Time is expensive. |
|
|
Before you can reply to a message... |
You must first register for a Remote Central user account - it's fast and free! Or, if you already have an account, please login now. |
Please read the following: Unsolicited commercial advertisements are absolutely not permitted on this forum. Other private buy & sell messages should be posted to our Marketplace. For information on how to advertise your service or product click here. Remote Central reserves the right to remove or modify any post that is deemed inappropriate.
|
|